'Matter Of Judicial Independence': CJAR Urges Supreme Court To Seek Centre's Explanation For Selective Stalling Of Judicial Appointments

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms issued a statement today condemning the Centre's withholding of appointment of Advocate Swetasree Majumdar and Advocate Rajesh Datar as judges of High Courts despite Collegium recommendations.

The organization has called on the Supreme Court to take up the matter on judicial side and demand an explanation from the Union government as to why the appointments of the two advocates were not timely processed.

It may be recalled that the two advocates recently withdrew their consent for judgeship after their names were segregated from those of other appointees and kept pending for approval without any reason, while those of the others were processed.

"We condemn the Union Government's unconstitutional and illegal move to “segregate” Ms Majumder's and Mr Datar's names from other recommendations. We reiterate that the practice of picking and choosing names for appointment from the list of names recommended by the Supreme Court collegium has no sanction in law and is a direct violation of the Supreme Court's judgement in the Second Judges (1994) and Third Judges (1999) cases", reads CJAR's statement.

Calling the delays unconscionable, CJAR states that the non-appointment of the above two advocates was inexplicable, when the Collegiums of the respective High Courts and the Supreme Court had approved their names. "The same thing having happened with Senior Advocate Mr Aditya Sondhi in 2022", the statement notes, while expressing disappointment that no measures have been taken by the Supreme Court collegium to prevent such a recurrence.

Further, it is highlighted that a writ petition is already pending before the top Court since 2018 seeking a mandamus from the government for timely judicial appointments in accordance with law and a direction against unilateral segregation of collegiums recommendations, "that is leading to the subversion of the judicial appointment process". However, no effective orders have been passed therein.

Calling on the Supreme Court to take immediate steps against the Union Government for its "willful disregard of the law and Constitution", the organization underlines that the future of an independent judiciary is at stake.

"While we appreciate the Supreme Court collegium making greater efforts to scrutinize candidates for judgeship by holding interviews with candidates, we believe this effort will come to nought if the Union is allowed to simply discard qualified and suitable nominees for no good reason."